Skip to main content
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences logoLink to Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
. 2002 May 7;269(1494):923–930. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2001.1946

Impacts of trout predation on fitness of sympatric sticklebacks and their hybrids.

Steven M Vamosi 1, Dolph Schluter 1
PMCID: PMC1690976  PMID: 12028775

Abstract

Predation may be a significant factor in the divergence of sympatric species although its role has been largely overlooked. This study examines the consequences of predation on the fitness of a pair of lacustrine stickleback species (Gasterosteus aculeatus complex) and their F(1) hybrids. Benthic sticklebacks are found in the littoral zone of lakes associated with vegetation and bare sediments, whereas limnetic sticklebacks spend most of their lives in the pelagic zone. The cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki) is a major predator of sticklebacks and the only other fish species native to lakes containing both benthic and limnetic species. In pond experiments we found that the addition of these predators primarily impacted the survival of limnetics. By contrast, benthic survival was unaffected by trout addition. The result was that relative survival of benthics and limnetics was reversed in the presence of trout. The presence of trout had no effect on the rank order of parent species growth rates, with benthics always growing faster than limnetics. F(1) hybrids survived poorly relative to benthics and limnetics and their growth rates were intermediate regardless of treatment. The results implicate predation by trout in the divergence of the species but not through increased vulnerability of F(1) hybrids.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (148.4 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brönmark C., Miner J. G. Predator-induced phenotypical change in body morphology in crucian carp. Science. 1992 Nov 20;258(5086):1348–1350. doi: 10.1126/science.258.5086.1348. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. McMillan W. O., Jiggins C. D., Mallet J. What initiates speciation in passion-vine butterflies? Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Aug 5;94(16):8628–8633. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.16.8628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Reznick D. N., Ghalambor C. K. The population ecology of contemporary adaptations: what empirical studies reveal about the conditions that promote adaptive evolution. Genetica. 2001;112-113:183–198. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Rundle H. D., Nagel L., Wenrick Boughman J., Schluter D. Natural selection and parallel speciation in sympatric sticklebacks. Science. 2000 Jan 14;287(5451):306–308. doi: 10.1126/science.287.5451.306. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Schluter D. Experimental evidence that competition promotes divergence in adaptive radiation. Science. 1994 Nov 4;266(5186):798–801. doi: 10.1126/science.266.5186.798. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Schluter D., Price T. D., Grant P. R. Ecological Character Displacement in Darwin's Finches. Science. 1985 Mar 1;227(4690):1056–1059. doi: 10.1126/science.227.4690.1056. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences are provided here courtesy of The Royal Society

RESOURCES